2. Shafaq Zernab-Chanakya Dialogue-23 Dec-2025-Oped thumbnail-January-2026-APP

On 27-28 November 2025, India hosted its flagship high-level strategic forum known as Chanakya Defence Dialogue (CDD). Since it was convened in the strategic backdrop of Operation Sindoor, an event that India claimed, ‘shattered Pakistan’s sense of invincibility’ and established a new ‘strategic grammar,’ naturally caught the attention of strategic minds in Pakistan. Yet, ironically the event exposed the vulnerabilities in India’s defence ecosystem. The confessions from senior military and industrial leadership revealed that internal frictions like bureaucratic inertia, cognitive warfare vulnerabilities and operational capability gaps are the real ‘monoliths’ that prevent India from becoming the ‘future-ready’ force that it claims to be under ‘Vision 2047.

The theme of CDD 2025 was ‘Reform to Transform: Sashakt, Surakshit aur Viksit Bharat,’ comprising 5 sessions, setting an agenda around Indian military Vision 2047. It is a strategic culmination of 4 springboards, including self-reliance, accelerated innovation in emerging technologies, civil-military fusion and cross-domain synergy, aiming to establish a fully-integrated force capable of carrying decisive multi-domain operations in a sustained and systematic way.

However, the dialogue exposed the internal impediments to realising this vision. The most striking revelation of the Dialogue was the consensus among the majority of military leaders that slow bureaucratic processes have undermined strategic aspirations.  Mr Ankit Mehta highlighted that administrative lethargy puts India at a disadvantage, citing that technology delays risks obsolescence before deployment. Shri Baba Kalyani, Chairman & MD, Bharat Forge Ltd, criticised the absence of a regulatory mechanism for the procurement of single-vendor innovations.  Former CNS, Admiral Karambir Sigh (Retd), posited that several layers of ‘process-oriented’ bureaucracies are the ‘biggest monolith,’ which could potentially undermine India’s goal of achieving ‘tempo-dominance’. Reform proposals to tackle this challenge include a Defence Technology Council to override slow cycles and shared accountability for finance controllers.

At CDD, regarding the doctrinal and operational flaws within the institutions, there was a shared albeit covert recognition from industrial and military officials, necessitating an immediate paradigm shift. As Ms. Prabha Goel, Executive Director (Marketing), BEL claimed that recent conflicts have unravelled India’s own capability gaps, which was endorsed by Admiral Singh. He argued that stove-piped organizational systems are incapable of delivering fifth-generation warfare capabilities. India’s structural deficiencies demand a leap from ‘jointness’ to ‘fusion,’ integrating intelligence, logistics and HR.

Failure to react will trap India in precarious retrofits; patching old systems and ceding advantage in a domain where future readiness hinges on embedded AI and sensors integration. This urgent shift to ‘Less steel, more sensors’ was aptly captured by Dr. Adrian Haack, Director, KAS. Lt Gen Raj Shukla (Retd), Member UPSC, pressed upon the issue of ‘obsolescence’ due to failure of integration, citing the challenges faced in the Russia-Ukraine war. This suggests that India is keen to address this critical flaw, realising that operational success hinges on an all-encompassing doctrine to achieve success on conventional, cognitive and algorithmic fronts.

The dialogue exposed a core contradiction in the Atmanirbharta (self-reliance) drive, rooted in procurement failures and inadequate financial commitments, stifling indigenous innovation. Ambassador Pankaj Saran, Former Deputy NSA criticised the unrealistic short deliveries provide India ‘screwdriver technologies’ and discourage R&D. This highlights that India’s military procurement manuals that prioritise process over results are outdated. Moreover, Indian claims of technological superiority are also stalled by large capital requirements, co-creation and testing support.

Perhaps the most important aspect was the emphasis on training of personnel. According to an article published in Dawn, a total of ten Indian Air Force jets were destroyed between 2020 and 2025. The major reasons were system malfunction, on-board emergency, but most importantly, training of personnel, where IAF lacks significantly as compared to Pakistan.

Lastly, the VCOAS (Lt Gen Pushpendra Pal Singh) designated strategic communication and narrative building as mission critical. However, during the dialogue, Palki Sharma tried to set the pace for toxic narrative but her initial outburst failed to excite the audience, which reveals the fragility of Indian domestic cognitive ecosystem. In a country where 98% of WhatsApp users treat forwards as authentic news show how BJP’s shallow narratives provide a ripe territory for manipulation. This renders India prone to AI-driven psychological operations and misinformation.

The CDD, intended to project India’s decisive victory, turned out to be an exposé of its internal friction points. The sane voices within Indian military, diplomatic and industrial cadre noted that bureaucratic bottlenecks, doctrinal and operational discrepancies and delayed technological inductions are the most formidable challenges that derail the materialisation of Vision 2047 of Indian military.

An analogy accurately captures the essence of India’s defence transformation. It is akin to an aspiring marathon runner, who invests heavily in high-tech shoes i.e., acquiring new platforms but does not train the core muscle i.e., the bureaucracy and R&D systems. The gear looks impressive at the starting line but without the foundational strength, the runner cannot perform in the gruelling race for strategic superiority.

Shafaq Zernab is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies, Islamabad. The article was published in The News International. She can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »